A Leadership Election? Probably.
ShareFirst it was December. Just give us until December, said Tom DeLay's personal whips in the House, and these charges will be behind us. But then the goal posts moved. January of 2006. Just give us until January of 2006, when Pat Priest will dismiss the charges. Another trial delay, and another plea: March. Just wait until March.
DeLay has a solid group of about fifty lawmakers who will move heaven and earth for him and who have been mightily effective at convincing colleagues not to agitate for a leadership election.
But with the Abramoff boot dropping today, signs abound that the House Republican caucus realizes that another, well, delay... simply isn't tenable.
Consider: the National Review tonight calls for DeLay to permanently step aside.
House GOPers interpret Speaker Dennis Hastert's quick and public decision to give back Abramoff donations as a sign that (a) it's ok for them to do so and (b) Hastert is ready to listen to their demands for an election.
To be sure, members are exhausted after their December marathon and the current House leadership has had, as of tonight, no recent discussions about elections.
But that will change, and soon. [MARC AMBINDER]
Advertisement
Join the Discussion